WGDF

[JimB]

White Guy Defense Force, seeing good in white guys that society thinks suck
White Guy Defense Force, if you came to laugh at white guys, I'm afraid you're out of luck

 

[Dragonbums]

This is a pointless area of discussion. There are countless factors that lead to the fight. And, as a shocker, not all of them lie on the consequences of Zimmerman's actions.

Then if Zimmerman had not gone out of the car what do you think Trayvon would of done as opposed to running away like he initially did?

No, it's not evidence. It's an account, that would have to be supported by evidence.

Evidence that Trayvon was being followed? Well Zimmerman already is the evidence since he stated himself that he was tracking him down before calling 911.

Yes, which is not what you claimed.

I never said I claimed that. I said someone else in the thread posted the call transcript in which the operator told Zimmerman not to follow Trayvon.

No. It's highly more likely that Zimmerman got out of his car, to ascertain the information for the question the 911 operator asked him.

And he couldn't of just gone to the street corner and look up at the sign all the while still being in his car? Or barring that use his smartphone?

Then, Trayvon, who was not in sight of Zimmerman, doubled back and attacked Zimmerman for whatever reason.

Because being followed in the middle of the night by a car for a couple of blocks and hearing said person get out of the car is clearly not a reason in the slightest.

As I said above, this is a pointless discussion. The fact that confrontation happened does not lie solely on the choices of Zimmerman.

Yes it does because Zimmerman was the one who chose to follow Trayvon in the first place.

I wonder if you'll tell that to the next person who claims he/she was being stalked when they were being followed around for a couple of blocks for quite a while.

See I can play the definition game too:

adjective
2.
of or pertaining to the act of pursuing or harassing: Stalking laws have alleviated some problems for famous people.

Oh, look at that. That also fits as an adjective. A description of a verb. So yeah, I think I am using the definition of stalking correctly.

Because you seem to think that the events that lead to the fight are more important than the fight itself.

Yes. You instigate something you are partly to blame. Just like how in school if you throw the first punch, it doesn't matter if the kid rails on you like a fucking gorilla you are still getting a consequence. It may not be as severe but you still started it.

And either way, that still isn't me denying the fight. That's just me saying that the person who started it has just as much to blame as the person who took it too far.

You know what? You're right. I most likely would have called the police. And, IF Trayvon had done that, instead of attacking Zimmerman, this whole fight wouldn't have happened and he'd be alive today. This should only highlight the fact that Trayvon did not action in a manner that you would expected "most people" to have done.

Because most people are cowardly and would of run away some more. However like I said people have a "fight or flight" response. And there are a few people that would fight rather than flight, and Trayvon apparently was of the fighting variety.

Charged with what exactly?

Well since Trayvon is dead there isn't much. At most perhaps disorderly conduct.

 

[Cerebrawl]

So yeah, not saying anything about what Zimmerman did being or not being a crime or anything, but it was still hella dumb.

The word you're looking for it rash. Acting too hastily or without due consideration. He was caught up in the moment, and caught up with being neighbourhood watch and maybe catching the burglars that had been breaking into houses in the area lately, which we know was fresh on his mind because he mentioned it in the 911 call.

 

[Cerebrawl]

Someone posted a 9-1-1 call transcript that described huffing in the background with the operator asking if he was going after Trayvon. Zimmerman replied yes and the operator said "don't do that."

Yes, which is not what you claimed.

It's not even true, Dragonbums is once again twisting the operators words. They didn't say "don't do that", which can be taken as an order, they said "we don't need you to do that", which is more of a "you don't have to put yourself in harms way", and certainly isn't an order. It's also notable that Zimmerman's heavy breathing stoped at this point, and the conversation continued with the 911 operator, so after that exchange he wasn't running, at most he was walking, and Martin could certainly have gotten away at this point if he didn't double back and attack Zimmerman. And the only reason Zimmerman had left the car and taken up chase in the first place, was because the 911 operator had asked where Martin went, and Zimmerman took after him to find out, so he could give the operator that information.

 

[Dragonbums]

Someone posted a 9-1-1 call transcript that described huffing in the background with the operator asking if he was going after Trayvon. Zimmerman replied yes and the operator said "don't do that."

Yes, which is not what you claimed.

It's not even true, Dragonbums is once again twisting the operators words. They didn't say "don't do that", which can be taken as an order, they said "we don't need you to do that", which is more of a "you don't have to put yourself in harms way", and certainly isn't an order. It's also notable that Zimmerman's heavy breathing stoped at this point, and the conversation continued with the 911 operator, so after that exchange he wasn't running, at most he was walking, and Martin could certainly have gotten away at this point if he didn't double back and attack Zimmerman. And the only reason Zimmerman had left the car and taken up chase in the first place, was because the 911 operator had asked where Martin went, and Zimmerman took after him to find out, so he could give the operator that information.

u

I don't believe I ever said Zimmerman kept running after the operator said not to. Although walking afterwards was an equally stupid idea if you can't see the person your going after.

EDIT: I also didn't suggest Zimmerman was ordered by the cops to go after him. Also I said that he could've done that just as easily in his car. Without getting out in the first place.

 

[madwarper]

Then if Zimmerman had not gone out of the car what do you think Trayvon would of done as opposed to running away like he initially did?

I don't know. Do you think Zimmerman would have gotten out of his car if Martin had not have run?

Evidence that Trayvon was being followed? Well Zimmerman already is the evidence since he stated himself that he was tracking him down before calling 911.

So? That's not illegal.

I never said I claimed that. I said someone else in the thread posted the call transcript in which the operator told Zimmerman not to follow Trayvon.

And, that's not what happened.

"We don't need you to do that" is NOT the same thing as "Do not follow".

And he couldn't of just gone to the street corner and look up at the sign all the while still being in his car?

What street corner? Martin ran back behind the houses, off the street.

Or barring that use his smartphone?

a) You assume he had a smartphone.
b) You assume that the streets of a private gated community would be on the map.
c) You assume the smartphone has accurate maps.

Spoiler

Because being followed in the middle of the night by a car for a couple of blocks and hearing said person get out of the car is clearly not a reason in the slightest.

That's one possible reason. Not a reason that would get Martin off of (attempted) murder charges, had he lived.

Though, you did completely miss the point of what I said. Why Martin attacked Zimmerman is irrelevant. That Martin attacked Zimmerman with lethal force, pinning him down and slamming his head into the conceit is the only thing that matters, and is why this is a clear cut case of self-defense and justifiable homicide.

Yes it does because Zimmerman was the one who chose to follow Trayvon in the first place.

Because, he thought Martin looked suspicious. You seem to think this is relevant. It is not.

I wonder if you'll tell that to the next person who claims he/she was being stalked when they were being followed around for a couple of blocks for quite a while.

If you remember, the definition of Stalking requires repeated actions.

Zimmerman had just saw Martin for the first time, and thus it could not have been stalking. If you have evidence to the contrary, then please share it with the rest of the class.

Oh, look at that. That also fits as an adjective. A description of a verb. So yeah, I think I am using the definition of stalking correctly.

You can think that all you want. It doesn't make it true.

Yes. You instigate something you are partly to blame. Just like how in school if you throw the first punch, it doesn't matter if the kid rails on you like a fucking gorilla you are still getting a consequence. It may not be as severe but you still started it.

You are wrong.

Let's take your example, Bill threw the first punch at Bob. In order to claim self-defense, Bob can only use force that's equivalent to the force used against him. However, if Bob starts slamming Bill's head into the ground, that is excessive force and the fact that Bill threw the first punch no longer matters. At the point that Bob starts slamming Bill's head into the ground, he has begun using lethal force. And, Bill would be justified in responding by using lethal force in return.

Though, to bring this back to reality. The physical evidence clearly showed that the only injuries Martin "suffered" were scrapped knuckles. So, Zimmerman must have instigated the fight by headbutting Martin's fist.

And either way, that still isn't me denying the fight. That's just me saying that the person who started it has just as much to blame as the person who took it too far.

And, do you have ANY proof of who started the fight? Yeah... I thought so.

Because most people are cowardly and would of run away some more. However like I said people have a "fight or flight" response.

You do understand there are options other than just running away or fighting... Right?

And there are a few people that would fight rather than flight, and Trayvon apparently was of the fighting variety.

But, good for him. He brought a fist fight to a man with a gun. I wonder if he was nominated for a Darwin award...

Well since Trayvon is dead there isn't much. At most perhaps disorderly conduct.

Except, his conduct wasn't disorderly. Martin's was, when he attacked Zimmerman.

 

[Cerebrawl]

Someone posted a 9-1-1 call transcript that described huffing in the background with the operator asking if he was going after Trayvon. Zimmerman replied yes and the operator said "don't do that."

Yes, which is not what you claimed.

It's not even true, Dragonbums is once again twisting the operators words. They didn't say "don't do that", which can be taken as an order, they said "we don't need you to do that", which is more of a "you don't have to put yourself in harms way", and certainly isn't an order. It's also notable that Zimmerman's heavy breathing stoped at this point, and the conversation continued with the 911 operator, so after that exchange he wasn't running, at most he was walking, and Martin could certainly have gotten away at this point if he didn't double back and attack Zimmerman. And the only reason Zimmerman had left the car and taken up chase in the first place, was because the 911 operator had asked where Martin went, and Zimmerman took after him to find out, so he could give the operator that information.

I don't believe I ever said Zimmerman kept running after the operator said not to. Although walking afterwards was an equally stupid idea if you can't see the person your going after.

Again, I think Zimmerman was a bit too rash, and eager to be helpful to the 911 operator, he took the neighbourhood watch duty seriously.

On the other hand, according to what Zimmerman told the police, he was jumped from behind while he was walking back to his car. Which certainly would explain how he never landed a blow on Martin in the fight, considering he(Zimmerman) was also training MMA.

And as some other posters have dug up here in this thread, Martin enjoyed fighting, and it was entirely in his character. We also have a witness who was speaking to him on the phone in the leadup to the fight, who testified in court that Martin had used racist terms to describe Zimmerman, when he called him a "Creepy-ass cracka". Who knows, maybe this was racially motivated violence... but from Trayvon Martin, not from Zimmerman.

 

[schrodinger]

Oh Grey, you cheeky bastard.

Is this going to become a little arc? if so then this will be hilarious.

EDIT:
Is it safe to come out yet?

Spoiler

Spoiler

*sees large as fuck arguments*

Nope.

as you were escapist

Spoiler

 

[Cerebrawl]

I don't believe I ever said Zimmerman kept running after the operator said not to. Although walking afterwards was an equally stupid idea if you can't see the person your going after.

Hmm let's see now, oh yes.

Then he gets out of his car- which I'm fairly sure a street smart kid like Trayvon- would have noticed his vehicular stalking at this point and gave chase. Even though the operators told him not to do that.

 

[Chromatic Aberration]

WGDF

No man left behind.

Read Full Article

Honestly, I do love how you guys can even stir up nine pages of flaming controvery with a single "coming soon" poster. Really, that one ought to earn you a 4chan-medal for exceptional skill at trolling the internet. I draw my hat before you guys! ...oh and I'm also very much looking forward to how this will turn out...I loved the first WGDF comic

OT: A large influx of bees oughta take care of that! [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYtXuBN1Hvc]

 

[Dragonbums]

I don't believe I ever said Zimmerman kept running after the operator said not to. Although walking afterwards was an equally stupid idea if you can't see the person your going after.

Hmm let's see now, oh yes.

Then he gets out of his car- which I'm fairly sure a street smart kid like Trayvon- would have noticed his vehicular stalking at this point and gave chase. Even though the operators told him not to do that.

Right. Where does that imply that I stated that the 911 operators demanded Zimmerman to give chase? Someone saying don't do that or you don't need to do that is still telling someone not to do something. The only difference is that Zimmerman continuing to give chase would him be disobeying an order.

That honestly doesn't change anything in any of the arguments because at no point did I ever question whether or not Zimmerman continued to give chase to Trayvon after the operator said not to.

 

[Dragonbums]

-snip-

Honestly I'm quite done arguing with the both of you. I've already concluded my argument with two other users who were a lot more polite and understanding of where I was coming from, and have responded to them in kind.


All your doing now is going around in circles and it's not going anywhere.

You continue to bring up little word games that mean fuck all to the over all argument and now arguing the legality of stalking and other such nonsense.


Zimmerman was being a fucking hot shot idiot and pretty much had it coming when he stalked a kid a bunch of blocks then got out of the car to go after him so more.

Vigilante, Night Watch, what the fuck ever they are, it doesn't matter. At the end of the day you aren't a cop and shouldn't act like you are. Especially when you aren't prepared for certain situations.

I can keep on going but if you want my answer just look at Therumancer and gmavericks' conversations and it's all laid bare.

 

[madwarper]

You continue to bring up little word games that mean fuck all to the over all argument and now arguing the legality of stalking and other such nonsense.

It may come as some surprise to you, but words have meanings. And, there are charged words that have specific negative connotations.

Stalking is such a word, as is murder. When you try to attribute them to this case, especially with disregard to their actual meaning, clearly shows a lack of objectivity and understanding.

Especially when you aren't prepared for certain situations.

Except, Zimmerman was prepared. After all, at the end of the night, he was still alive.

 

[scotth266]

Honestly, this is the last thread where I expected to see warnings and suspensions.
There's literally nothing in this comic for people to argue about. And yet, argue they do.

Escapist, you are simply far too easy to provoke.

Have you considered the comic posted is a throwback? I mean, Grey and Cory are basically digging the dead thread up for the sake of digging it up. If I were being mean, I'd call it the ultimate creative circlejerk spiral - create something controversial, then reference it every once in a while to get views and discussion.

I'm not surprised though, given that they keep bringing up that Evangelion joke when the joke itself wasn't even that good. I love Critical Miss sometimes, but when they pull this shit it gets old real quick.

 

[Sylocat]

Unbelievable. A PREVIEW has over 300 comments, half of them fighting over the Martin/Zimmerman thing.

 

[Sylocat]

Oh, and I'll just leave this here [http://www.salon.com/2014/05/17/white_supremacist_george_zimmerman_defender_flip_flops_says_he_should_have_been_found_guilty_partner/]...

;-)

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

*slight rant over* all that aside, I don't think zimmerman should have gotten off the way he did, but from what I had read in the original case, the plaintiff did not play it smart and went for home runs when they could've for sure gotten him jail time on smaller charges, especially considering they had the burden of proof and had to find a way to not make the "stand your ground" defense okay in this instance.

I don't agree that he should've been hit with any charges, much less convicted. There wouldn't even have been a trial if not for the media lynching, it's that clear-cut.

It's been a while so I can't remember, but are there no harrassment/stalking charges that can be brought to court? just genuinely curious here.

And Zimmerman's defense didn't use "stand your ground", that's just what some gun control vultures tried to make it about. He used a "self-defense" defense. Stand your ground didn't even factor into it, because he was on his back and sat on, he could not retreat, so even without the stand your ground law, he would be justified, under the older "duty to retreat" law, since he was effectively cornered.

my mistake, it's been quite a while since I had all the details in my mind and I just remember someone attempting to use the "stand your ground" law.

Maybe it could of been a coincidence. But then the question was asked, if this was a person of Caucasian or white in appearance would the man of done what he had done? What muddles it even more is that he stated that he "felt threatened" even though he was the one that went outside of the hotel and confronted them in the first place and promptly shot one of them afterwards because he claimed "he saw a gun" even though no gun was to be found when they did a search in the car in question.

That is a question to ask, but I don't know if it should be on the forefront of the case. Someone who is mentally ill or an asshole can harm someone of *insert other race here* without it being racially motivated, so I try not to jump to conclusions on racial motivations unless there is evidence or context to suggest as much. (I live in a pretty diverse area racially, as seen here)

Spoiler: image of area based on race

so race is an easy go to card, but it hardly ends up being the case most of the time. Anecdotal evidence and all that, but I'm used to not it being so "black and white" so to speak. He could easily be a racist asshole, but just as easily I'm used to seeing a mentally ill asshole.

I suppose that is true. However then we get into murky territories where one can commit a crime against another person and it's absolved or downplayed a lot because "he wasn't a good/calm/well mannered/ person anyway. That's dangerous territory right there. Trayvon was a thug? High chance yes, however that doesn't mean that the events that happened to him at night should of happened. Unless you see people or have strong evidence against them doing something wrong, all of your actions otherwise are mere speculation. As we have it in Trayvon's case, Zimmerman went on a hunch about Trayvon and decided to take action. Maybe in any other scenario Trayvon might of been doing something illegal. But in this instance he wasn't doing anything, and evidence afterwards showed that he didn't have anything on him illegal in the first place which blew it up in the first place.
Especially as you've stated it's not uncommon for "suspicious" kids especially of other ethnicities to be stopped by the law and various other vigilantes for "looking like a threat" when 8/10 times they were just walking home or to another place of service or residence in the middle of the night.

This is true, but when you are in front of a Jury in a court room, such evidence can sway decisions heavily. (a man that was previously found guilty of rape in court was brought to court again for another possible rape? you bet your sweet ass he is going to be given absolutely NO benefit of the doubt.) That's obviously different from trayvon, and I don't think that he deserved or that is how it should've gone down. Fortunately for zimmerman he was elected as the neighborhood watch, so he was inclined to morph into action with his social justice warrior powers while possible hoodlums were on the loose in his neighborhood (I believe there had been recent break ins or something in the neighborhood, which caused the tensions pre-stalking). To me, this is one of those cases that is not going to make anyone feel like justice was served or there was a proper decision for everyone.

 

[madwarper]

It's been a while so I can't remember, but are there no harrassment/stalking charges that can be brought to court? just genuinely curious here.

No. Because harassment [http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/harassment] and stalking [http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Stalking] both require continued/repeated actions. Since that was the first interaction between Zimmerman and Martin, neither harassment nor stalking charges would be applicable.

my mistake, it's been quite a while since I had all the details in my mind and I just remember someone attempting to use the "stand your ground" law.

That might have been because the media made a big hullabaloo about SYG laws, even though it had nothing to do with the Zimmerman. Then, the media tried to draw parallels to case that did try to use SYG as a defense to get charges dismissed and failed.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

It's been a while so I can't remember, but are there no harrassment/stalking charges that can be brought to court? just genuinely curious here.

No. Because harassment [http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/harassment] and stalking [http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Stalking] both require continued/repeated actions. Since that was the first interaction between Zimmerman and Martin, neither harassment nor stalking charges would be applicable.

ah yep, that's what it is, my business law class only covered some of those for maybe all of 5 seconds so didn't remember exactly. thank you.

my mistake, it's been quite a while since I had all the details in my mind and I just remember someone attempting to use the "stand your ground" law.

That might have been because the media made a big hullabaloo about SYG laws, even though it had nothing to do with the Zimmerman. Then, the media tried to draw parallels to case that did try to use SYG as a defense to get charges dismissed and failed.

Yepp, must have accidentally shuffled some of that media info into my "shit that actually matters" side of my brain by mistake. Curious if you would know, is there any way zimmerman could bring charges against these media outlets for false claims/slander? (such as NBC editing the 911 call to make it sound like zimmerman had racist intentions) or as you just mentioned, the parallels to the case based on SYG defenses?

 

[madwarper]

Yepp, must have accidentally shuffled some of that media info into my "shit that actually matters" side of my brain by mistake. Curious if you would know, is there any way zimmerman could bring charges against these media outlets for false claims/slander? (such as NBC editing the 911 call to make it sound like zimmerman had racist intentions) or as you just mentioned, the parallels to the case based on SYG defenses?

Zimmerman had filed a defamation suit over NBC's use of the edited 911 tape. In May 2014 [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/05/01/nbc-seeks-dismissal-of-zimmerman-suit-over-911-tape-edits/?clsrd], NBC tried to have the lawsuit dismissed. I can't seem to find anything more recent than that.